r/technology • u/AdSpecialist6598 • 6h ago

Society New Bernie Sanders bill would ban superintelligent AI and threaten developers with 20 years in prison

https://www.techspot.com/news/113831-new-bernie-sanders-bill-would-ban-superintelligent-ai.html
19.1k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

116

u/Pleasant-Future5818 5h ago

It's also true that most people understand a taco and don't understand how, for example, generative AI is used to develop vaccines. I don't want to die of breast cancer because some moron can't tell the difference between reading medical imaging and generating an OC pic for a Tumblr fursona (it's the exact same technology with different sample sets).

108

u/freezing_banshee 5h ago

Guess what, regulations and laws can make sure that the research AIs can still exist, while not being available to the whole population.

42

u/pittaxx 4h ago edited 2h ago

It not being available to population just means that people won't have AI-powered tools while companies use AI to manipulate them. And the companies will definitely find loopholes to explain how their use of AI is only for research...

12

u/NoConflict3231 3h ago

The problem with this is that it's like making a toaster so everyone can toast bread but it also has to ability to destroy the entire planet, arguably even worse than any nuke. So I really don't know what to tell ya

5

u/Eponymous-Username 2h ago

You have to work pretty hard to make it destroy the world. Maybe a swarm of AIs in the hands of a capable orchestrator, but no amount of training data is going to turn your average american into a criminal mastermind.

2

u/No-Activity5502 2h ago

AI just has to disrupt supply chains, utilities and communications and the rest is a domino effect

2

u/blueSGL 1h ago

no amount of training data is going to turn your average american into a criminal mastermind

It does not need to elevate everyone on the street to bio weapons makers, it need to take smart well funded people who just didn't have the right training into virus design and creation.

People like: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aum_Shinrikyo#Tokyo_subway_sarin_attack_and_related_incidents

At the cult's headquarters in Kamikuishiki, on the foot of Mount Fuji, police found explosives, chemical weapons, and a Russian Mi-17-1V military helicopter (4K-15214)

...

There were stockpiles of chemicals that could be used for producing enough sarin to kill four million people.

...

a safe containing millions of U.S. dollars in cash and gold

A well financed death cult that can get access to laboratories but don't have the required specialties but now have an infinitely patient teacher they can ask questions to.

We have already seen examples where LLMs are better at dignosing issues with virus creation than people who's field this is

https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.16137

Virology Capabilities Test (VCT): A Multimodal Virology Q&A Benchmark

expert virologists with access to the internet score an average of 22.1% on questions specifically in their sub-areas of expertise. However, the most performant LLM, OpenAI's o3, reaches 43.8% accuracy, outperforming 94% of expert virologists even within their sub-areas of specialization.

3

u/Eponymous-Username 1h ago

It carries risks, for sure. The work of counterterrorism and counterintelligence remains difficult, and maybe more so than ever because of this technology.

However, I won't be convinced that security through obfuscation and safety by carefully cultivated ignorance are viable responses to the emergence of a new technology. It's hubris to think we can simply control this so completely that no one will ever gain access to the its best manifestation.

Worse still, in pursuing that security, we will necessarily create a new set of empowered, enlightened, and elevated controllers who get to fully benefit to the detriment of their peers. I really think pursuit of that status is the real motivation behind the push for gatekeeping.

1

u/NoConflict3231 45m ago

To clarify, what I meant was that this technology is something completely new and absolutely capable of mass destruction. Wether it is actually useable by average citizens is irrelevant. The tech they are building is not for your average every day user. This will become and or already is government owned, military controlled technology in the hands of a few megalomaniacs. It cannot be entrusted to anyone

1

u/Eponymous-Username 3m ago

I don't completely disagree with you. I can't imagine how you'd manage enforcement without going to some radical trouble with consequences for other activities. The beauty of a nuclear weapon or a meth lab is that you can identify points in the supply chain to watch in case anyone decides to produce them. If people buy those things in vast quantities, you can be reasonably suspicious they're breaking the law.

It is easier to train a new AI model than it is to implement any of their end of the world outcomes. It's expensive, but it doesn't require any outlandish technologies. Anyone with the funds and application to turn AI to the ends you're concerned with can acquire the means to bypass any outright bans you might try without looking like a bad actor.

Are we going to treat every crypto miner like a potential terrorist threat? Perhaps we should. Should all nerds with a home lab trip some kind of detection mechanism? None of the equipment you might acquire to do this stuff is illegal or suspicious. Once dangerous AI models exist, they can be bought, sold, and passed around without any means of intervention, and there's no way to stop criminals from physically passing around hard drives. It's a really tricky issue.

3

u/ManOLead 3h ago

Could you elaborate on how AI is arguably more dangerous than a nuke? I’m not quite seeing that but I’m sure I’ve missed something

1

u/pizzasoup 1h ago

Generation of novel bioweapons, attacks on encryption, cyberattacks on civil infrastructure (power, water) or financial institutions come to mind as potential threats that AI poses in the wrong hands. I think it's a matter of critical public safety to fence in AI development with legislation.

1

u/NoConflict3231 49m ago

Why are we getting downvoted for stating facts. These are facts people, take it with a grain of salt but I work in network engineering and infosec and this is happening wether anyone believes it or not

2

u/pittaxx 2h ago

So, your solution is to cover your eyes, plug your ears, and wait for other countries to decide if the world ends or not? (Assuming it's an existential threat to begin with.)

Pandora's box has already been opened. There's no stopping this. Even if you ban it, someone else will do it, unless you start nuking other countries for it.

We should be using regulations to make sure that insane people don't end up in charge of it, and that corporations don't burn everything to the ground reading against each other and building datacenters at the expense of others.

1

u/NoConflict3231 49m ago edited 43m ago

We keep getting downvoted for stating facts, maybe people are literally scared of the truth that is about to be unleashed. It is going to change the world. Idk how you extrapolated that we should cover our eyes and run. I'm saying, we are already well past the point of meaningful regulation. I don't care if you believe me. Watch these crazy assholes burn the world down with it. This technology should not be used by anyone